H.264 vs. H.265

[DroneTone]

Looking for benefits of using one format over another.
I know H.265 is newer and supposed to use better compression algorithms and be smaller in size than H.264.
However, H.265 stutters badly on Mac Mini and barely keeps up on my iMac.
H.264 didn't have (as much) difficulty running raw videos, (MOV).

I decided to record two 30 second videos (HQ, 24fps) in H.264 and H.265 and compare them.
I was surprised to see the H.264 was 417 MB and the H.265 was 414 MB in size.
With so little difference in file size, is it worth it to film in H.265?
Certainly playback is smoother with H.264 on older computers.
Not sure if there is any video quality difference.

Comments?

 

[Lon Denard]

Looking for benefits of using one format over another.
I know H.265 is newer and supposed to use better compression algorithms and be smaller in size than H.264.
However, H.265 stutters badly on Mac Mini and barely keeps up on my iMac.
H.264 didn't have (as much) difficulty running raw videos, (MOV).

I decided to record two 30 second videos (HQ, 24fps) in H.264 and H.265 and compare them.
I was surprised to see the H.264 was 417 MB and the H.265 was 414 MB in size.
With so little difference in file size, is it worth it to film in H.265?
Certainly playback is smoother with H.264 on older computers.
Not sure if there is any video quality difference.

Comments?

I really am not sure... The color profile on normal is really starting to grow on me. I did my first 20 flights in DLog 10 bit and struggled to edit it using proxies or just picking one frame, color grading and applying to all. If you want to check out my stupid YouTube channel. The last 3 or so videos are in normal and the previous 6 or so were 10 bit.

 

[Prmath]

Looking for benefits of using one format over another.
I know H.265 is newer and supposed to use better compression algorithms and be smaller in size than H.264.
However, H.265 stutters badly on Mac Mini and barely keeps up on my iMac.
H.264 didn't have (as much) difficulty running raw videos, (MOV).

I decided to record two 30 second videos (HQ, 24fps) in H.264 and H.265 and compare them.
I was surprised to see the H.264 was 417 MB and the H.265 was 414 MB in size.
With so little difference in file size, is it worth it to film in H.265?
Certainly playback is smoother with H.264 on older computers.
Not sure if there is any video quality difference.

Comments?

Yes...... dial in what works best for YOU and stick with it.....

 

[TheRock]

Everything is moving H.265 so you might as well update your Apps and start using it. It is the future. The optimal time to make the transition depends on the user’s situation, of course. But as 4K becomes the standard, H.265 will become a necessity. I have photo agents that sell my images and they are insisting on 4K now for the video clips as opposed to 1080 and HD video. So if you have the opportunity to make the transition, go for it. The newest generation of MacBook Pros includes the Kaby Lake-powered hardware support for decoding the codec. The video format will also be used in Apple’s tvOS and Safari web browser for streaming video. And Windows now has a free update for it.

 

[parkgt]

Everything is moving H.265 so you might as well update your Apps and start using it. It is the future. The optimal time to make the transition depends on the user’s situation, of course. But as 4K becomes the standard, H.265 will become a necessity. I have photo agents that sell my images and they are insisting on 4K now for the video clips as opposed to 1080 and HD video. So if you have the opportunity to make the transition, go for it. The newest generation of MacBook Pros includes the Kaby Lake-powered hardware support for decoding the codec. The video format will also be used in Apple’s tvOS and Safari web browser for streaming video. And Windows now has a free update for it.

Not sure of your point they are both 4K? For many people H.264 is all they need or can handle, they should not feel any pressure to move to H.265. Unless someone has the time and ability to color grade well, they will probably have more pleasing results with Normal (H.264).

 

[TheRock]

Not sure of your point they are both 4K? For many people H.264 is all they need or can handle, they should not feel any pressure to move to H.265. Unless someone has the time and ability to color grade well, they will probably have more pleasing results with Normal (H.264).

I would hope everyone runs their RAW video through some sort of editing process. For me, that is a given, although I am not sure what color has to do with the formats. H.265 is pretty much the standard now. So I am not sure of your point. Why wait unless your system can't handle the updates?

 

[gnirtS]

264 v 265 is not about file size issues. 265 contains 10 bit not 8 bit data so for a similar file size contains substantially more colour and light information so better quality video to then edit with.

 

[parkgt]

I would hope everyone runs their RAW video through some sort of editing process. For me, that is a given, although I am not sure what color has to do with the formats. H.265 is pretty much the standard now. So I am not sure of your point. Why wait unless your system can't handle the updates?

I think that most do edit, but a large percentage probably do not have machines that handle H.265.
Plenty of people are getting good results in H.264 4k. There even appears to be some evidence that Normal can be as sharp if not sharper than D-log on the M2.

How many people, your agents included can tell whether rendered footage was shot in 4k H.265 instead of 4k h.264? Where is H.265 a standard now?

 

[TheRock]

I think that most do edit, but a large percentage probably do not have machines that handle H.265.
Plenty of people are getting good results in H.264 4k. There even appears to be some evidence that Normal can be as sharp if not sharper than D-log on the M2.

How many people, your agents included can tell whether rendered footage was shot in 4k H.265 instead of 4k h.264? Where is H.265 a standard now?

The H.264 that you love so much was developed in 2003. It has taken a while for it to catch on and the same will happen H.265, but it will become the standard so why wait? Do you lack processing power? I can't think of many good reasons not to move forward. Agents usually can't tell but it is a selling point. Back when they demanded still mages be TIF files, a good JPG image could be copied as a TIF and submitted to the agent and not a word was said as long as it was a sharp, well-processed image. Now, they get requests for 4K so they have to show clients 4K so they ask for 4K from the videographers they rep.

 

[parkgt]

You

The H.264 that you love so much was developed in 2003. It has taken a while for it to catch on and the same will happen H.265, but it will become the standard so why wait? Do you lack processing power? I can't think of many good reasons not to move forward. Agents usually can't tell but it is a selling point. Back when they demanded still mages be TIF files, a good JPG image could be copied as a TIF and submitted to the agent and not a word was said as long as it was a sharp, well-processed image. Now, they get requests for 4K so they have to show clients 4K so they ask for 4K from the videographers they rep.

H.264 Normal off the Mavic is 4K! Needing 4k has nothing to do with whether it is H.264 or H.265. I don't know why you keep mixing the two as if they are the same thing?

Almost all M2P footage taken so far by me has been in D-log. I have a fast i7 8700 with 32gb ram with a GTX1070 TI and dual 4k monitors so I have no issues viewing or editing H.265. Others don't have and don't need to feel any pressure to update just to use H.265; it is not a delivery standard yet.

 

[TheRock]

You


H.264 Normal off the Mavic is 4K! Needing 4k has nothing to do with whether it is H.264 or H.265. I don't know why you keep mixing the two as if they are the same thing?

Almost all M2P footage taken so far by me has been in D-log. I have a fast i7 8700 with 32gb ram with a GTX1070 TI and dual 4k monitors so I have no issues viewing or editing H.265. Others don't have and don't need to feel any pressure to update just to use H.265; it is not a delivery standard yet.

I wrote this in the first post. Did you miss it?
"The optimal time to make the transition depends on the user’s situation, of course."
No it isn't standard yet, just like H.264 wasn't in 2003. But it will be. Again, why wait if you don't have to? I am not mixing the two. I said agents now want 4K instead of 1080 and HD, also in the first post. Submit the older codec if you want since you have no plans to move forward. (Dead horse GIF)

 

[Prmath]

That’s the answer...... your “agent”
Just donate your footage to this “agent” ...........
Then, later on down the road, this person can donate $$$ back to You........

 

[TheRock]

That’s the answer...... your “agent”
Just donate your footage to this “agent” ...........
Then, later on down the road, this person can donate $$$ back to You........

That's an odd response. You send your clips to a stock agency and the agents within that company try to sell the clips for you. They take a cut for their efforts and you take a cut for the use of your property. Why do you use the word "donate"?

 

[Sockeye]

The 10 Bit 100mbit H265 container can carry so much more information, why not use it?

The only thing was the CPU power needed, as the x.265 codec in 10 Bit can only be encoded/decoded properly the CPU (GPUs cannot help here) . I therefore upgraded to a 16core machine and am happy.

 

[Kilrah]

I was surprised to see the H.264 was 417 MB and the H.265 was 414 MB in size.
With so little difference in file size, is it worth it to film in H.265?

H265 is more efficient, that means you can either have smaller files of similar quality, same size files with better quality or anything in between. DJI chose same size but better quality. Up to you to decide whether you see that difference in quality and whether it matters enough to you to offset the processing demand drawback.

 

[TheRock]

The 10 Bit 100mbit H265 container can carry so much more information, why not use it?

The only thing was the CPU power needed, as the x.265 codec in 10 Bit can only be encoded/decoded properly the CPU (GPUs cannot help here) . I therefore upgraded to a 16core machine and am happy.

Amen!!

 

[owg666]

You


H.264 Normal off the Mavic is 4K! Needing 4k has nothing to do with whether it is H.264 or H.265. I don't know why you keep mixing the two as if they are the same thing?

Almost all M2P footage taken so far by me has been in D-log. I have a fast i7 8700 with 32gb ram with a GTX1070 TI and dual 4k monitors so I have no issues viewing or editing H.265. Others don't have and don't need to feel any pressure to update just to use H.265; it is not a delivery standard yet.

parkgt

I have the exact same setup as you with SSD’s running the OS and vid software. Which program ate you using for grading ?? Just getting into this and using Vegas Pro, DaVinci and Premier Pro CC.

 

[bobomet]

264 v 265 is not about file size issues. 265 contains 10 bit not 8 bit data so for a similar file size contains substantially more colour and light information so better quality video to then edit with.

THIS is the answer. I'm thinking the problem, for those using 4-5 year old GPU's and CPU's, is that 4K is the limitation.
Try stepping down to 2K and see if there is an improvement.

 

[TheRock]

parkgt

I have the exact same setup as you with SSD’s running the OS and vid software. Which program ate you using for grading ?? Just getting into this and using Vegas Pro, DaVinci and Premier Pro CC.

Final Cut Pro

 

[parkgt]

Final Cut Pro

No, I don't run Final Cut Pro.